Re: "Central Station Service" Poll

["mbbaker@xxxxxxxxx" <mbbaker@xxxxxxxxx>]

As one of those stupid jackasses at NFPA, I'd like to respond.  I don't
work for NFPA, I'm a volunteer on a technical committee along with
thousands of other volunteers who spend their own time and money on a
regular basis to improve codes and standards.  A butt load of us are in
Orlando this week to work on the 2007 version of NFPA 72.

You're right badenov, it's a terminology problem.  It has to do more
with history than anything else.  Committee members have improved the
verbiage and continue to do so, but we need your help.  You're a smart
guy (I assume or you'd use natasha) and I challenge you and all
naysayers who spend time wailing and gnashing your teeth when trying to
apply code language to the real world.  I challenge you to submit
proposals to change the language.  To make it easier to use.  In the
back of every NFPA standard is a form to submit a proposal.  Heck, I'll
fill the form out for you.  Just email the exisitng code language to me
along with your proposed change and I'll prepare the document with your
name on it and submit it for you.

It's not a rotten system and it doesn't mainly benefit UL, NFPA, and
large alarm companies.  It (our system of building codes and
installation standards) is the result of our industry's consenus as to
how to balance life safety and property protection with available
resources.  If you don't like it, fix it!  Propose changes, make
comments to proposed changes, vote, and participate!

I feel better now. Thanks.

Mike

--
Michael B. Baker, SET
Michael Baker & Associates, Inc.
PO Box 737
Gladstone, OR 97027-0737
503-657-8888 v
503-655-1014 f
ET News(r) http://www.etnews.org